The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim due to the need for additional medical evidence and a medical opinion regarding whether his left eye disability, including blindness, was caused by retained lens fragments from the April 22, 2010 surgery.
The deciding factor: The Court instructed the Board to decide if the argument between the surgeons at the April 15, 2010 surgery caused additional injury and whether such action constitutes 'carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, or similar instance of fault' or an act not reasonably foreseeable.
- Claimed conditions
- left eye blindness, left eye disability
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- July 11, 2016
- Citation
- 1627499
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1627499.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's left eye injury, claimed as blindness, finding that it had its onset in service and is related to his military service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to duty-to-assist errors, including failing to obtain SSA records and VA medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's left eye disability is secondary to his service-connected hypertension.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran is granted special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance due to his service-connected diabetic peripheral neuropathy.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn by his attorney, and the Board is dismissing the case.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.